Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

On November 17, 2012, the Defendant discovered 10,000 won of cash 10,000 won, driver's license, resident registration certificate, solar securities cash card, foreign exchange bank credit card, Korean bank credit card, and new bank credit card, and then embezzled 20,000 won of the market price of the victim's own cash 10,000,000 won of the victim's own c underground 1,00,000 won in Ansan-si Group B, Ansan-si. The Defendant embezzled it without taking necessary measures to return it to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Application of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes on evidence photographs;

1. Relevant Article 360 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Parts of the offense under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the provisional payment order;

1. Around November 17, 2012, around 21:40, the Defendant: (a) placed the victim D on the packaging stand and stolen the victim’s cash 10,000 won in cash; (b) placed the victim D on the packaging stand; (c) placed the victim’s KRW 10,00,000,000,000,000,000 won in the market price of each one of the bank, foreign exchange card, credit card, Korean bank, and new bank credit card.

2. Determination

A. The term “discoverment” means the removal of the property possessed by another person against the will of the possessor and the removal of the property from one’s or a third party to another’s possession. Whether a certain property is occupied by another person shall be determined by considering the intention of control as a subjective element in addition to the scope of management as an objective element or the possibility of factual management, and ultimately, by considering the form of the pertinent property and other specific circumstances, from a normative perspective

(Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3252 Decided July 10, 2008). B.

The victim of this case.